My two cents on the political economics of the first political crisis in Italy… with a shrinking Parliament. What are the incentives for Italian Senators, if they put themselves first and the country’s welfare next? Take the 2018 elected Senate, no subsequent party change

Let me assume that next election will be with a pure Proportional system -- no majority premium, no minimum thresholds. Strong simplifying assumption, I know: deciding the new electoral system is another interesting game on its own! I use yesterday SWG electoral polls
5 Stars movement (15.7% expected vote share) down from 111 to 31 seats: 80 current Senators going from MP salaries to….basic income (scary, um?). Democratic Party (19.6%) from 53 seats to 39 + 6 seats (counting Renzi’s Italia Viva). Forza Italia (6.3%) from 57 seats to only 13!
Even the most voted party Salvini’s League (23.5%) may lose seats: from 58 to 47. The big winner is Meloni’s Italian Brothers (16.3%) from 18 to 33 seats. So not surprisingly, Meloni & Salvini want early elections to get back in power. But the others?
5Star MPs will try to hold on to their seats: early elections cost each of them at least € 250k. Their leader may want to bet all their chips on a new Conte government, but do they have enough leverage to control their troopers if other govenments (options to stay on) emerge?
Mr. Conte wants to hold on to power. Power grows up on you, doesn’t it? If he won’t manage (but ask Renzi), he might create his own party. Polls give him a sound 15% vote share. But would he have the financial resources and the logistics? Few have Berlusconi’s deep pockets.
Mr. Zingaretti (Democratic Party’s leader, in case you haven’t heard of him) is committed to another Conte government. It beats me what makes Conte, first chosen as a “notary” by Salvini (League) and Di Maio (5 Stars), the perfect Prime Minister for the Democrats. But still…
If a third Conte government doesn’t fly, Zingaretti can flirt with early elections. It will result in fewer Dem Senators, but chosen by Zingaretti, not by Renzi as the current. Yet, Conte may launch his own party and erode Dem vote shares and seats. A waiting game for Zingaretti
Renzi’s (and Forza Italia) best option is to participate in a grand coalition (or technocratic government) and take credit for, if it does well, while avoiding early elections… the game has just started, let’s hope it won’t last too long

More from Politics

39.1% of Democrats think that it's wrong to negatively stereotype people based on their place of birth... AND that Southerners are more racist. https://t.co/yp1hviLuBB


65.2% of Republicans think that people shouldn't be so easily offended... AND that Black Lives Matter is offensive.
https://t.co/znmVhqIaL8


64.6% of Democrats think that a woman has the right to do what she wants with her body... AND that selling organs should be illegal.

48.5% of Democrats think that a woman has the right to do what she wants with her body... AND that prostitution should be illegal.


57.9% of Republicans think that people should be free to express their opinions in the workplace... AND that athletes should not be allowed to sit or kneel during the national anthem. https://t.co/ds2ig1NJFr


Democrats: Men and women are equal in their talents and abilities. Also, women are superior. https://t.co/bEFSmqQguo
Handy guide for Dominic Raab and other Brexiteers, and for anyone keen to replace our EU trade with trade with the rest of the world on WTO terms...


You can't magic away the vast distances involved. Clue: we fly in only 1/192th of our trade compared to the amount that arrives via sea


But even if you invented a teleporter tomorrow, WTO terms are so bad, so stacked against us, that a no-deal Brexit will be a total economic disaster


And while the Brexiteers fantasise, real jobs are being lost, investments are drying up, companies are moving assets to the EU27 or redomiciling. All already happened and happening right now, not in some mythical


Of course, there are many, many myths that Brexiteers perpetuate that are total fiction. You've seen a couple of them already. The thread below busts a whole lot

You May Also Like

A brief analysis and comparison of the CSS for Twitter's PWA vs Twitter's legacy desktop website. The difference is dramatic and I'll touch on some reasons why.

Legacy site *downloads* ~630 KB CSS per theme and writing direction.

6,769 rules
9,252 selectors
16.7k declarations
3,370 unique declarations
44 media queries
36 unique colors
50 unique background colors
46 unique font sizes
39 unique z-indices

https://t.co/qyl4Bt1i5x


PWA *incrementally generates* ~30 KB CSS that handles all themes and writing directions.

735 rules
740 selectors
757 declarations
730 unique declarations
0 media queries
11 unique colors
32 unique background colors
15 unique font sizes
7 unique z-indices

https://t.co/w7oNG5KUkJ


The legacy site's CSS is what happens when hundreds of people directly write CSS over many years. Specificity wars, redundancy, a house of cards that can't be fixed. The result is extremely inefficient and error-prone styling that punishes users and developers.

The PWA's CSS is generated on-demand by a JS framework that manages styles and outputs "atomic CSS". The framework can enforce strict constraints and perform optimisations, which is why the CSS is so much smaller and safer. Style conflicts and unbounded CSS growth are avoided.